Primary tabs

After we adjusted for numerous confounding factors, gun possession by urban adults was associated with a significantly increased risk of being shot in an assault. On average, guns did not seem to protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. Although successful defensive gun uses can and do occur, the findings of this study do not support the perception that such successes are likely.

A few plausible mechanisms can be posited by which possession of a gun increases an individual's risk of gun assault. A gun may falsely empower its possessor to overreact, instigating and losing otherwise tractable conflicts with similarly armed persons. Along the same lines, individuals who are in possession of a gun may increase their risk of gun assault by entering dangerous environments that they would have normally avoided.58–60 Alternatively, an individual may bring a gun to an otherwise gun-free conflict only to have that gun wrested away and turned on them.

Comments

A mountain of statistical calculations on a tiny data set, biased to prove prejudicial, pre-determined conclusions, and utterly ignoring that the FULL population data shows the simple fact that the crime rate continues to decline, in the face of record-breaking firearm sales the past 4 years.

I only hope they didn't waste too many tax dollars on this nonsense. 67 footnotes indeed!

Maybe they can quit giving the drug companies a pass on the REAL cause of mass shootings and other induced violence: http://www.ssristories.com/

... to indict the study, but that's the claim the study makes. Here is the cilaim:

gun possession by urban adults was associated with a significantly increased risk of being shot in an assault.

Since you don't challenge that, I assume you that gun culture's claim that guns work for protection is false. For the rest of your indictment of the study, I need evidence, not words strung together. Finally, nice deflection on drugs. I don't see a reason we can't license guns like cars, and not induce violence with SSRI, assuming your anecdotal site is valid. Why can't we do two good things at a time (like walking and chewing gum)?

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Mahatma Gandhi

The claim is in the Conclusion: "On average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault.", which is the takeaway.

That is pure crap.

Given the footnotes, as well as easily available public data, this study was evidently created to justify a predetermined conclusion and camouflauged with statistical window-dressing. It may be the result of incompetence, but more likely encouraged and funded as an effort at deliberate propaganda.

Here is the evidentiary data you asked for, which clearly contradicts the study's conclusions:

OBSERVATION: The crime rate in all categories declines steadily, starting BEFORE the 1994 - 2004 "assault weapons ban", continuing after it expired, and in particular, during the massive increases in recent ownership, evidenced by Background Checks.

Nor is http://www.ssristories.com/ a "deflection", as it documents nearly 5,000 cases of induced violence. Drug companies are being given a "pass" on the liability for this, and the professional academics ignore the facts, which are CLEARLY counter to the crime rate trend.

There is no more need to "license" guns than screwdrivers or kitchen knives; the average shooter can easily have as many of each, for different purposes. "License fees" impose an undue financial burden. Aside from the fact that cars are not "licensed", they are titled as real property and only "registered" when in regular use (as opposed to museum displays, private collections, etc.) No license is required merely to own a car.

Many things are deadly in the hands of someone with violence in mind, not just long metal objects.

Winter is coming so PLEASE help lambert...

... who is going into the this winter having sunk a bundle into an insulating project so he doesn't bleed money into the air, for starters, and still needs to pay the bills so he can feed the hamsters that power the wheels that turn the servers at The Mighty Corrente Building. Please, won't you help keep the hamsters shiny and well-fed?

No PayPal Account required! Give the hamsters immediate relief!

Or Subscribe to make a monthly payment!

Corrente is completely supported by contributions from readers (and, to be fair, a tiny smidge of Powell's commissions). We do not take advertising, so we can say whatever the Fuck we want. Thank you!

The 12-point platform

"The 12-Point Platform" is a simple list of common-sense programs that will benefit every American, no matter their class, gender, race, or age (PDF).

The Village is the few thousand people inside the Beltway who control the political life of the country; they are responsible for managing the Overton Window, for example. They are thoroughly bi-partisan. They all know each other, and they all fuck each other (both senses). The term "Village" (my term was Versailles on the Potomac) captures their provincialism, their pettiness, and how small (all senses) they really are. I believe Village is also the name of a horror movie that Digby had in mind.

Citibank Plutonomy files

"What could go wrong?
Beyond war, inflation, the end of the technology/productivity wave, and financial collapse, we think the most potent and short-term threat would be societies demanding a more ‘equitable’ share of wealth."

Corrente Fellows (emeritus)

Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment (snort) advice, or legal advice, or medical advice, or any kind of advice. BANKSTER WEASEL PROPHYLACTIC: The word "alleged" is deemed to occur before the word "fraud." Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.